BRANDON: Russia’s launching of two satellites was a great shock to the Western world. Do you think American scientists or the government were to blame for Russia’s being ahead of the United States in this field?
RABI: Of course there’s not so terribly much science in Sputnik. It’s chiefly a matter of engineering. We need to make headway in exploring new fuels, and in improving electronic guidance systems and engine designs. All this is not basic science. It does not mean that the Russians are ahead of us in basic science, but they are probably well ahead in rocketry.

AT THE END of the first part of this critique it was concluded that NATO’s current military doctrines and forces all too closely resemble what Mr. George F. Kennan said in his Reith Lectures on the BBC that they ought to be, with the unhappy consequence that many people in Britain and on the Continent have convinced themselves that Mr.

DISENGAGEMENT is no longer a dirty word in the Western diplomatic vocabulary. In principle, most NATO governments now recognize that disengagement might offer a way out of their current dilemmas. But so far, most of the supporters of disengagement have either left their ideas too vague for serious discussion or have arbitrarily tied disengagement to other conceptions which are even more controversial. George Kennan, for example, in his Reith Lectures, did as much as any other single person to awaken international interest in the idea of disengagement.